sign in sign up
<<
Home , Calculus Made Easy, Martin Gardner, Project Alpha, Raymond Damadian

A Mind at Play An Interview with

KENDRICK FRAZIER

is mind is highly philosophical, at home with the most abstract concepts, yet his thinking and writ­ Hing crackle with clarity—lively, crisp, vivid. He achieved worldwide fame and respect for the three decades of his highly popular mathematical games column for , yet he is not a mathematician. He is by every standard an eminent intellectual, yet he has no Ph.D. or academic position. He has a deep love of science and has written memorable science books (The Ambidextrous Universe and The Relativity Explosion, for instance), and yet he has devoted probably more time and effort to—and has been more effective than any thinker of the twentieth cen­ tury in—exposing and bogus science. He is considered a hard-nosed, blunt-speaking scourge of paranormalists and all who would deceive themselves or the public in the name of science, yet in person he is a gentle, soft-spoken, even shy man who likes nothing better than to stay in his home with his beloved wife Charlotte in

34 March/April 1998 Hendersonville, North Carolina, and write on his electric typewriter. His critics see him as serious, yet he has a playful mind, is often more amused than outraged by nonsense, and believes with Mencken that "one horselaugh is worth ten thousand syl­ logisms." He is deeply knowledgeable about conjuring and delights in learning new magic tricks. He retired from Scientific American more than fifteen years ago, but his output of books, articles, and reviews has, if anything, accelerated since then. (He's now written more than sixty books, and more are in the works.) His knowledge and interests span the sciences, philos­ ophy, mathematics, and , yet he professes no special standing as a Renaissance man. He has received major awards from scientific societies and praise from some of the nation's leading scholars ("One of the great intellects produced in this country in this century," says ), some of whom forthrightly consider him an intellectual hero, yet he remains modest about his contributions.

At eighty-three, Martin Gardner reigns supreme as the leading light of the modern . More than four and a half decades ago, in 1952, he wrote the first classic book on modern pseudoscientists and their views, Fads and Fallacies in the Name of Science, and today it remains in print and widely available as a Dover paperback and is as relevant as ever. It has influenced and inspired generations of scientists, scholars, and nonscientists. He followed that up in 1981 with Science: Good, Bad, and Bogus. In an essay in the New York integrity started it all." Although Martin Gardner seldom trav­ Review of Books entitled "Quack Detector," els to CSICOP meetings, he remains, through his personal welcomed the book and said Martin Gardner "has become a contacts, insights, published writings, and voluminous corre­ priceless national resource," a writer "who can combine wit, spondence, a profound influence on CSICOP, modern skepti­ penetrating analysis, sharp prose, and sweet reason into an cism, and intellectual discourse broadly. expansive view that expunges nonsense without stifling innova­ He answered questions posed by SKEPTICAL INQUIRER tion, and that presents the excitement and humanity of science Editor . in a positive way." After that, in the same genre, came The : Notes of a Fringe-Watcher (1988), On the Wild Side (1992), and Weird Water and : More Notes of a Fringe- SI: In your book of essays The Night Is Large: Collected Essays Watcher (1996). 1938-1995, you organized your lifelong intellectual interests into seven categories: physical science, social science, pseudoscience, The subtitles refer of course to his column "Notes of a mathematics, the arts, , and religion. Do they have Fringe-Watcher" (broadened from its original tide, "Notes of equal importance to you? How do you rank them in importance a Psi-Watcher"), which has graced the pages of the SKEPTICAL or interest—to you? to others? Do you see them as complementary INQUIRER every issue since Summer 1983- His first SI column, aspects of one coherent worldview, or are some separate? "Lessons of a Landmark PK Hoax," dealt with 's Gardner: My main interests are philosophy and religion, then-just-revealed experiment, in which Randi with special emphasis on the . I majored planted two young magicians in a laboratory in philosophy at the (class of 1936), to see if the lead investigator could detect their trickery. The having entered the freshman class as a Protestant fundamen­ three Gardner anthologies each consist of half 5/columns and talist from Tulsa. I quickly lost my entire faith in Christianity. half reviews and writings for other publications. It was a painful transition that I tried to cover in my semi- When the Committee for the Scientific Investigation of autobiographical novel The Flight of Peter Fromm (now a Claims of the (CSICOP), publisher of the paperback). I actually doubted the theory SKEPTICAL INQUIRER, was established in 1976, Martin of evolution, having been influenced by George McCready Gardner was one of its original founding fellows, and he has Price, a Seventh-day Advcntist creationist. A course in geology remained a member of its Executive Council and Editorial convinced me that Price was a crackpot. However, his flood Board ever since. When offered the opportunity fifteen years theory of fossils is ingenious enough so mat one has to know ago to write a regular column for SI, he quickly agreed. He some elementary geology in order to see where it is wrong. dedicated The New Age anthology to CSICOP's founder and Perhaps this aroused my interest in debunking pseudoscience. chairman: "To , a friend whose vision, courage, and After I returned from four years in the Navy as a yeoman,

SKEPTICAL INQUIRER March/April 1998 35 I returned to Chicago and would have gone back to my former and cruel. Ditto for Spanish bullfighting. job in the university's press relations office had I not sold a In high school I was on die gymnastic team (specializing in humorous short story to Esquire. This was my first payment the horizontal bar), and I played lots of . I would enjoy for anything I'd written. It persuaded me to see if I could sur­ tennis today except that I had cataract surgery early in life. vive as a freelancer, and for the next year or two I lived on Without eye lenses, one cannot continually alter one's focus, income from sales of fiction to Esquire. My second sale was a so there is no way to anticipate exacdy where the ball is as it story based on topology titled "The No-Sided Professor." It comes toward you. was my first effort at science fiction. SI: Do you wish you had pursued one field more, to the exclu­ While freelancing, I took a seminar (using GI bill funds) sion of the others? from the famous Viennese philosopher of science Rudolf Gardner: I'm glad I majored in philosophy, though had I Carnap. It was the most exciting course I ever took. Years later known I would be writing some day a column on math, I I persuaded Carnap to have the course tape-recorded by his would have taken some math courses. As it was, I took not a wife and to let me shape die recording into a book. Basic single math course. If you look over my Scientific American Books issued it under the title Philosophical Foundations of columns you will see that they get progressively more sophis­ Physics. The title was later changed to Introduction to the ticated as 1 began reading math books and learning more Philosophy of Science. All die ideas in the book are Carnap's, all about die subject. There is no better way to learn anything the wording mine. Dover recently reprinted it in paperback than to write about id with an afterword about how the book came about and my SI: You probably could have been either a philosopher or a memories of Carnap. During the writing of this book, I mathematician—which a lot of fans of your Scientific American exchanged many pleasant letters with Mrs. Carnap, but before columns probably thought you were. die book was published, for reasons unknown to me, she killed Did you ever think about going into academia? herself by hanging. Gardner: Early on in college I decided I wanted to be a Carnap had a major influence on me. He persuaded me writer, not a teacher, and I have never regretted this decision. diat all metaphysical questions are "meaningless" in the sense It is the reason I took only one year of graduate work, and that they cannot be answered empirically or by reason. They never cared to go for a master's. can be defended only on emotive grounds. Carnap was an SI: Given your breadth and variety of interests, how would atheist, but I managed to retain my youthful theism in die you describe yourself— your professional field? form of what is called "." I like to call it "theological Gardner: I think of myself as a journalist who writes mainly positivism," a play on Carnap's "logical positivism." about math and science, and a few other fields of interest. Shortly before he died, wrote to say he had SI: I appreciate the becoming modesty, but I think you may be reread my Whys of a Philosophical Scrivener and was it fair to too self-effacing. Douglas Hofstadter has said "Martin Gardner is say that I believed in solely because it made me "feel one of the greatest intellects produced in this country in this cen­ good." I replied that this was exactly right, though die emo­ tury. " Stephen Jay Gould has said you have been "the single tion was deeper than the way one feels good after three drinks. brightest beacon defending rationality and good science against It is a way of escaping from a deep-seated despair. William the mysticism and anti-intellectualism that surround us." James's essay "The Will to Believe" is the classic defense of the Certainly you must be pleased to be so highly regarded. right to make such an emotional "leap of faith." My theism is Gardner: Yes, I am pleased, though Hofstadter, a good independent of any religious movement, and in the tradition friend, surely exaggerates, and ditto for Gould, a marvelous that starts with and includes Kant, and a raft of later writer I hope to meet some day. philosophers, down to Charles Peirce, , and SI: What do you consider to be the relationship between your Miguel de Unamuno. I defend it ad nauseam in my Whys. interests in writing about science and in debunking pseudoscience? SI: How have you managed to retain such a phenomenal Which has more appeal to you? breadth of interest and knowledge? Gardner: In a way, I regret spending so much time debunk­ Gardner: Philosophy gives one an excuse to dabble in ing bad science. A lot of it is a waste of time. I much more everything. Although my interests are broad, they seldom get enjoyed writing die book with Carnap, or The Ambidextrous beyond elementary levels. I give the impression of knowing far Universe, and other books about math and science. more than I do because I work hard on research, write glibly, SI: What motivates you? You have been writing on pseudo- and keep extensive files of clippings on everything that inter­ science and fringe-science since at least 1950. The Washington ests me. Post reviewer of"The Night Is Large described you—correctly, I There are big gaps in my knowledge, one of die largest of think—as "almost certainly the most eminent of pseudo- which is classical music. I have a poor ear. My tastes run to science since World War II." Do you find pseudoscience and para­ Dixieland jazz and melodies I am able to hum and play on a normal claims inherently fascinating—you seem both wryly musical saw (one of my minor self-amusements). I know noth­ amused and deeply concerned—or do you consider critiquing them ing about sports other than baseball. I have never played a more a task that has to be done? If the latter, what keeps you going game of golf or seen a horse race. I never watch football or bas­ at it? ketball. I think boxing should be outlawed as too primitive Gardner. I'm not sure why I enjoy debunking. Pan of it

36 March/April 1998 SKEPTICAL INQUIRER surely is amusement over the follies of true believers, and partly entire galaxy if it is devoid of life. I belong to a group of because attacking bogus science is a painless way to learn good thinkers known as the "mysterians." It includes , science. You have to know something about relativity theory, Thomas Nagel, John Searle, , Colin McGinn, for example, to know where opponents of Einstein go wrong. and many others who believe that no computer, of the kind we You have to know something about probability and statistics to know how to build, will ever become self-aware and acquire recognize Michael Drosnin's The Bible Code as hogwash. You the creative powers of the human mind. I believe there is a have to know the power of the placebo and faith to see why deep mystery about how emerged as brains is the very model of a quack. became more complex, and that neuroscientists are a long long Another reason for debunking is that bad science con­ way from understanding how they work. tributes to the steady dumbing down of our nation. Crude SI: What trends have you seen in popular belief in pseudo- beliefs get transmitted to political leaders and the result is con­ science and the paranormal in the past half century? Has it gotten siderable damage to society. We sec this happening now in the better or worse? What are your greatest concerns? rapid rise of the religious right and how it has taken over large Gardner: I think popular belief in bogus sciences is steadily segments of the Republican Party. I think fundamentalist and increasing. When 1 was a boy, there were only one or two Pentecostalist Pat Robertson is a far greater menace to America astrologers who wrote newspaper columns. Now almost every than, say, Jesse Helms who will soon be gone and forgotten. paper except , not to mention dozens of I am happy to see the job of debunking bad science being magazines, features a horoscope column. Professional astrol­ taken over by others, especially by scientists like the late Carl ogers now outnumber astronomers. For Pete's sake, a president Sagan who came to realize the importance of speaking up. I of the and his first lady were buffs! am delighted that Philip Klass is doing such a good job on This would have seemed unthinkable a hundred years ago. UFO nonsense because it allows me to avoid this dismal topic. Alternative medical views are growing rapidly, especially on I was tempted to wade into The Bible Code. Now I don't need college campuses where more students are relying on homeo­ to after reading Dave Thomas's definitive blast in the pathic remedies than ever in history. Real tragedies occur when SKEPTICAL INQUIRER [November/December 1997]. persons avoid sound medical help and rely on worthless claims. SI: You are generally considered one of the harshest critics of the paranormal and I believe that the human mind, or even the its proponents. How would you characterize your position? mind of a cat, is more interesting in its complexity Gardner: I like to think I am unduly than an entire galaxy if it is devoid of life. harsh and dogmatic only when writing about a pseudoscience that is far out on the continuum that SI: What do you see for the future in that regard? runs from good science to bad, and when I am expressing the Gardner I see the immediate future as having a steady views of all the experts in the relevant field. Where there are increase in superstitions. Fundamentalism, especially die areas on the fringes of orthodoxy, supported by respected sci­ Pentecostal variety, is growing rapidly, not only here but in entists, I try to be more agnostic. I am certain, for example, that other nations, notably in South America. And not only among astrology and are totally worthless, but I have no Protestants but also among Catholics and Jews. The Catholic strong opinions about, say, superstring theory. Superstrings are Church is on the brink of its greatest blunder since it con­ totally lacking in empirical support, yet they offer an elegant demned Galileo. It is close to declaring that Mary is a "co- theory with great explanatory power. I wish I could be around redeemer" with Christ! (Mother Teresa was a strong supporter fifty years from now to know whether superstrings turn out to of this.) Of course, if the pope declares infallibly that this doc­ be a fruitful theory or whether they are just another blind alley trine is true, it will kill the ecumenical movement. in the search for a "theory of everything." Did you know that Dr. , the distin­ There are dozens of monumental questions about which 1 guished inventor of magnetic resonance imaging (the MRI have to say "I don't know." I don't know whether there is intel­ test), has declared himself a creationist and a young-Earther? ligent life elsewhere in the universe, or whether life is so SI: Apart from popular belief in pseudoscience, how about improbable that we are truly alone in the cosmos. I don't know what we might call experimental parapsychology—work done by whether there is just one universe, or a multiverse in which an Ph.D. 's in the laboratory that some keep pointing to as evidence of infinite number of universes explode into existence, live and ESP or PK—going back to J. B. Rhine's experiments in the 1930s die, each with its own set of laws and physical constants. I and 1940s and most recently the ganzfeld experiments, the persis­ don't know if will someday give way to a tent claims about and Robert John's random- deeper theory. I don't know whether there is a finite set of basic number-generator work? Where does all that stand in your view? laws of physics or whether there are infinite depths of structure Gardner I'm all in favor of parapsychologists continuing to like an infinite set of Chinese boxes. Will the electron turn out look for evidence of psi, and their experiments certainly are to have an interior structure? I wish I knew! more carefully controlled than in the days of Rhine. It has I can say this. I believe that the human mind, or even the often been pointed out that as Rhine slowly learned how to mind of a cat, is more interesting in its complexity than an tighten his controls, his evidence of psi became weaker and

SKEPTICAL INQUIRER March/Apr,! 1998 37 weaker. However, the evidence will not become convincing to and has since faded away. other psychologists until an experiment is made that is repeat- 57: Which of your own books are your favorites? Which have able by skeptics. So far, no such experiment has been made. been most popular? Which are most important? Jahn's evidence for psi is statistical, and there are many ways Gardner: Of my books, the one that I am most pleased to his statistics, which favor psi to a very slight degree, can be have written is my confessional, The Whys of a Philosophical unconsciously biased. As far as I know, no one else has been Scrivener, with my novel about Peter Fromm running second. able to duplicate his computer-generated results. SI: And which of your books have been the most popular, have SI: Are you discouraged by the rejection of science in certain sold best? Which do you think have been the most influential? parts of academia heavily influenced by the postmodernist antipa­ Gardner: The one book of mine that has sold the most thy toward science and reason? The So ha I hoax, which you wrote copies is far and away my Annotated Alice. It has never been about so amusingly certainly exposed that movements scientific out of print since it was published in 1960, and has now sold vacuuousness. over a million copies in hard- and soft-cover editions here and Gardner: Yes, I am dismayed by the increasing effort of the in England. Of my books about pseudoscience, I suppose the postmoderns to view science as a solely cultural phenomenon first one, now tided Fads and Fallacies in the Name of Science, rather than as a highly successful and ongoing search for objec­ has been the most influential on later writing about similar tive truths about the universe. No one wants to deny that topics. science is corrigible, but it is a wonderfully successful self- SI: Whatever you write about, you seem always to call on great correcting process that gets ever closer to objective truth. storehouses of specific information—-journal papers, magazine Postmodern nonsense has even invaded mathematics, as wit­ articles, newspaper clippings, etc., going back decades. I've heard nessed by 's just-published book What Is Randi describe with some awe your filing system. Can you tell us Mathematics, Really? I have a lengthy critical review of this about it? book in the Book Review (October 12, 1997), Gardner: Yes, my files are my number one trade secret. It defending the opinion of almost all mathematicians today or began in college with 3x5 file cards that I kept in ladies shoe in die past that mathematics has a curious kind of reality inde­ boxes. I had a habit then (this was before copy machines) of pendent of human minds. The universe is made of particles destroying books by slicing out paragraphs and pasting them and fields about which nothing can be said except to describe on cards. A friend once looked through my cards on American their mathematical structures. In a sense, the entire universe is and was horrified to discover I had destroyed several made of mathematics. If the particles and fields are not made rare first editions of books by Scon Fitzgerald. of mathematical structure, then please tell me what you think When I began to earn some money I moved the cards into they are made of! metal file cabinets, and started to preserve complete articles SI: When you wrote the book Fads and Fallacies in the Name and large clippings and correspondence in manila folders. of Science, did you expect that it would become the classic it has These folders are now in some twenty cabinets of four or five become? drawers each. And I have a large library of reference books that Gardner: No, I never expected Fads and Fallacies would save me trips to die library. I have not yet worked up enough long remain in print. The first edition, titled In the Name of courage to go on line for fear I would waste too much time Science, sold so poorly that Putnam quickly remaindered it. surfing the Internet. Not until Dover picked it up did its sales take off, thanks in SI: How do you manage to keep up with everything? large degree to Long John Nebel, then a popular all-night Gardner: I keep up my interests by taking scores of period­ radio talk-show host. For many months, he had guests on icals that deal with topics I may write about, especially science almost every night to attack the book. I remember one night, and math journals. I have been a lifelong subscriber to Science when I had gotten out of bed to change a diaper on our first News, which you once edited. I could never have written my born, I turned on the radio and heard John Campbell, then Scientific American columns without access to math magazines editor oiAstounding Science Fiction, say "Mr. Gardner is a liar." that ran articles and problems that could be considered recre­ I had a chapter about his role in introducing L. Ron Hubbard's ational in . . Campbell claimed it had cured his sinusitis. I never SI: For as world-famous and respected as you are—your writ­ dreamed that would last more than a few years, ings have been inspirational to two generations of prominent because its claims were so preposterous. It maintained, for scientists and scholars—you usually have worked alone. You sel­ example (and still does), that immediately after conception, dom, if ever, go to conferences or meetings. Only a few of your long before the embryo develops ears, it makes recordings many fans and readers have ever seen or heard you in person. (called engrams) of all the words spoken by or to the mother! Why? Has this been an advantage to you—no distractions, for I would never have dreamed that UFOs, to which I also instance—more time for writing? Have there been drawbacks to devoted a chapter, would become a mania that would increase this solitary work style? steadily over the next half century. I expected Wilhelm Reich's Gardner I have often been called shy, and with justifica­ therapy to be short lived, yet it is still going strong. tion. I prefer one-to-one relationships to crowds. I hate going Come to think of it, is the only major pseudo- to parties or giving speeches. I love monotony. Nothing pleases science I know about that once flourished around the world me more than to be alone in a room, reading a book or hitting

38 March/April 1998 SKEPTICAL INQUIRER typewriter keys. I consider myself lucky in being able to earn a An outstanding instance of this failure is John Beloff's living by doing what I like best. As my wife long ago realized, unwillingness to learn anything about magic. Not many years I really don't do any work. I just play all the time, and am for­ ago, he wrote that die card tricks of a certain magician repre­ tunate enough to get paid for it. sented one of die strongest recent proofs of paranormal pow­ SI: You seem to be curious about everything. What most ers! When watched diis magician do his simple delights you? Scientifically? Professionally? Personally? card magic, it was perfectly obvious how he was obtaining his Gardner: 1 am most delighted by learning something new effects by methods well known to card magicians. and significant. (I leave aside me delights of relationships with SI: You were a founding fellow of CSICOP and have been a my wife, widi relatives, and with friends). This year I had the member of the Executive Council since the beginning. How have pleasure of updating and expanding a 1910 book by Sylvanus you seen our role? What advice do you have for us for the future? Thompson called Made Easy. It was a great pleasure Gardner: CSICOP is obviously doing a much-needed job to learn, for die first time, some basic calculus, and to appre­ in combating America's dumbing down, especially in provid­ ciate fully its enormous elegance and power. ing a source to which editors of magazines and newspapers, Next to learning something about science or math that I and the makers of TV shows can turn to get information about didn't know before, my next greatest pleasure is learning a bogus claims. It is a role that will be increasingly important in newly invented magic trick. Conjuring has been a hobby since the years ahead. I was a boy. Some of the best magic tricks operate on scientific or mathematical I consider myself lucky in being able to earn principles. One of my earliest books, a living by doing what I like best. Mathematics, Magic and Mystery (still in print as a Dover paperback) deals with this overlap of magic SI: It's hard to believe you have been writing your "Notes of a and math. Fringe-Watcher" column in SI for almost fifteen years—especially Let me give one example. Arrange the cards in a deck so since you didn't start it until retiring from your long-running they alternate blacks and reds. Cut die deck in half, making Scientific American column. Do you miss doing the latter? sure the bottom cards of each half are of opposite color. Riffle Gardner: I do indeed miss writing the Scientific American shuffle die halves together once, making the shuffle as careless column. I had reached a point where I could no longer keep or thorough as you please. Now remove cards from the top of up die column and write the books I hoped to write as long as the deck in pairs. Each pair will contain a red and a black card! I had my wits about me. Also, I felt it was time for younger Dozens of clever card tricks have been based on this curious writers to take over the column. principle. To prove that it must work leads straight into non- One of the lasting benefits of having done the column was trivial combinatorial theory. getting to know, as personal friends, so many mathematicians, SI: Many prominent skeptics are likewise knowledgeable about real mathematicians, far more knowledgeable dian I, and magic. How important is such an understanding in evaluating whose work I could only dimly appreciate. It would take a paranormal claims? page just to list their names. Another continuing pleasure is Gardner: I don't think a knowledge of magic is important getting letters from mathematicians telling me it was my col­ in countering paranormal claims, except in connection with umn that aroused their interest in math when they were in self-styled who claim extraordinary paranormal pow­ high school and led them to decide on math as a career. ers. Such psychics use methods which have in common the SI: Well, we all hope you will continue writing your "Notes of methods of magicians. A man can be a great scientist, or a a Fringe-Watcher" column in SI for a long time to come. It clearly greater writer, and be so easily fooled by simple methods of continues to be provocative. deception mat his opinions about extraordinary claims of psi Gardner: Thanks! powers are utterly worthless. Conan Doyle, for example, SI: Your readers worldwide have been blessed by your thinking would never have believed in the genuineness of spirit medi­ and writing over your long and prolific career, well into a time ums who levitate tables and themselves, float trumpets, pro­ most people have retired We all hope you can continue for a long duce visible spirits of the dead, exude through their time to come. How is your health? noses, and so on, if he had had even the most superficial train­ Gardner At eighty-three, I tell people I don't feel a day over ing in the methods of conjuring. The parapsychologists who seventy-five. Seriously, I have few complaints except an enlarg­ once took Ted Serios and others like him seriously would have ing prostate that occasionally bothers me at night, and mild been spared dieir embarrassments had diey known anything high blood pressure, which I control with Hytrin. Short-term about magic. A knowledgeable magician, watching these "psy­ memory is not what it used to be. My wife and I frequently chics" perform on stage, knows at once how they obtain their spend twenty minutes at the dinner table trying to recall the wonders. It is a scandal that even today so few parapsycholo­ name of someone wc both know well until suddenly one of us gists think it worthwhile to study the methods of magicians shouts it out. I am fortunate in having parents who each lived before they test a who performs incredible feats, then into their nineties. I hope my dear wife Charlotte outlives me, publish papers testifying to die genuineness of the psychic's although wc both look forward to celebrating die arrival of the powers. year 2000, and seeing our grandchildren become adults. D

SKEPTICAL INQUIRER March/April 1998 39